Re: [xml] Providing standard COM modules (Was: [xslt] Thread safe?)

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 01:09:23PM +0200, Igor  Zlatkovic wrote:
> 
> >   C# bindings will be next to Schemas in my roadmap so far.
> 
> That would be a cool thing. It would bring DotGNU and similar projects
> few steps further. In fact, I could sit down and see if I can get that
> running. I'll need more coffee, for I'll have to give up sleep :-)

  I asked Miguel de Icaza when the Mono framework would be good enough
for me to start doing this and be useful and his answer was "a couple
of months", on the other hand if you guys have too much energy and
an existing C# Windows based framework, then go ahead. My suggestions
would be:
   - reuse the XML formal descriptions already used by the python 
     bindings
   - use C# scripts to read those and generate stubs automatically
   - try to respect the same Class partitioning and if possible
     naming conventions as I did for the Python bindings (reading
     the said python based generators would help !)
   - then provide language glue on top of it to encapsulate the raw
     bindings and make them more palatable to C# users, trying to dig
     whant would be needed at the C library level to emulate the system.xml
     classes would also be extremely useful in the long term.

  If people feel an urgent need to go through that challenge that
would be my suggestions on how to proceed.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard@redhat.com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/